He is just a journalist, sitting in London with a keyboard, writing in an English newspaper: I donīt remember him sounding off when he lived in America.

But words are cheap, and this feels like a lecture from an angry headmaster to naughty schoolchildren. It is rather pointless unless he addresses the audience that really needs to hear it.

The reality is that although the scale of this attack was large, nobody is that surprised it has happened. It would be so much more convenient to people like this journalist if he was a crazy Muslim immigrant, or a man with a grudge, or even just a psychotic paranoid schizophrenic. In reality he seems to be an ordinary white guy, a millionaire, successful businessman, living in a nice neighbourhood who has never been in trouble with the police; and what that means is, if he can do it, so can anyone else; it is just a matter of time before somebody decides to better this manīs record of kills and get their name in the papers.

Ive recently been watching a series called "60 days in Jail" about some civilians posing as criminals were put into an American jail for 60 days to give feedback and hopefully improve the system - thats not important here - when they were released one of the women went to her hotel and her husband and baby were waiting there. He'd bought her a present - a new bag - he said there's something inside - it was a new hand gun. I was shocked! She was pleased, took it out looked at it then just threw it in the bag, clearly nothing special or scary. Strange......

He lived there ten years, and waited for the last show, on the last day, to say anything! Unbelievable! perhaps it had just dawned on him that it was a problem? Even then the only analogy he can make is by comparing it to eating chocolate eggs.

You mentioned Piers Morgan , contrary to your " he was not living in America , he was " you denied that he had spoken earlier , he clearly had , if you do not mind Ian , I will trust the to the mods judgement as to being on topic or not , thank you .

You mentioned Piers Morgan , contrary to your " he was not living in America , he was " you denied that he had spoken earlier ,

Your defence of Mr Morgan is admirable, if a little bit of a diversion, and somewhat perplexing. I did not deny he had ever lived in America. Your own article pointed out that he was half way out of the door when he began to complain about his hosts. He is a gobby journalist always trying to put himself in the headlines, but clearly someone you feel is worth defending. I expect you are going to pick up on my use of "always" and find a thousand references to when he has not tried to be centre stage.